1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff’s husband’s husband He (CB, hereinafter “the deceased”) extracted tin from July 1, 1969 to February 10, 1989, and worked at the Dong Sea Business Office in Gangwon-do where he produces cement. On May 20, 1986, the Plaintiff’s husband’s her husband’s her husband was determined as class 6-5 of the disability grade after receiving medical treatment on April 30, 2006 due to occupational accidents. In the diagnosis of pneumoconiosis precision conducted on April 2006, the Plaintiff was determined as being subject to medical care as “new pneumoconiosis type 1, merged engine infection (b), and engine expansion.”

B. On June 2, 2015, the Deceased died as a direct cause, and the Plaintiff filed a claim for the payment of survivors’ benefits and funeral expenses to the Defendant on the ground that the deceased’s death was caused by the pneumoconiosis, which is an occupational accident, and by the merger thereof.

However, on February 1, 2016, the Defendant rendered a disposition to refuse it on the ground that “the deceased cannot be deemed as having died of pneumoconiosis or its combination, etc.” (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, 10, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion: (a) the Plaintiff returned to pulmonary tuberculosis, which is a liver toxic substance, after being infected with chronic hepatitis B virus; and (b) the Plaintiff received medical care treatment due to radiation emitting pipes, pneumoconiosis symptoms, the merger mark board infections, engine bomb, lapsy, and discarded species due to a long time of occupational accidents; and (c) the Plaintiff died of liver infections and liver infections rapidly aggravated beyond natural progress, resulting in a liver and liver cancer.

Therefore, the death of the deceased constitutes occupational accidents and thus, the rejection disposition of this case is unlawful.

(b) Entry in the attached Form of relevant Acts and subordinate statutes;

C. The deceased’s medical history and death.